Boy Scouts' gay policy change is one small step

When Neil Armstrong said, "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind," he actually screwed up. He meant to say, "One small step for A man," which makes more sense.

Armstrong later tried to correct his mistake, but his original statement is the one people remember.

I think the Boy Scouts of America took one small step for man last week by voting to lift their ban on openly homosexual Scouts. I've written columns and blog posts urging the Scouts to drop their ban on gays altogether rather than just letting local units decide for themselves, the proposal the Scouts pushed back last winter. I think this is an improvement on that.

But since the decision leaves the ban on gay Scout leaders unchanged, here's the question for those of you who believe the organization was misguided in its previous policy. Does this change go far enough to be considered a giant leap for mankind? An encouraging precursor to a giant leap? Too little, too late?

The Scouts' official statement gives no hint that this is considered a transitional step. In fact, it says, "As the National Executive Committee just completed a lengthy review process, there are no plans for further review on this matter."

It's clear that this is a political compromise, an attempt to balance the boycotts and other criticism of the Scouts' anti-gay policies with the likelihood of backlash among those who think gay people are a corrupting influence.

For the latter, I'm sure this goes too far. For me, it doesn't go far enough, because it doesn't address the underlying perception that gay people pursue an immoral lifestyle.

Yes, it says, we'll put up with the misguided children, maybe in hopes of bringing them around. Still, gay people aren't fit to be leaders, not because they're more likely to molest our boys — although I guarantee that's what a lot of opponents are thinking — but because they aren't the kind of ideal we want children to emulate.

For that reason, I won't be satisfied until the Scouts are sexuality neutral, recognizing that a gay leader is no less capable of representing the values that the organization should be focused on.

Still, I only spent a couple of years in Scouting, so I put the question to Mario Machado, the Upper Macungie Eagle Scout who returned his Eagle medal to protest the organization's anti-gay policies. His mostly positive reaction was too long to fit here, so I'll use as much as I can and run his whole email — along with the full text of the Boy Scouts of America's official statement — on my blog Thursday.

As I mentioned when I wrote earlier this year about his rationale for returning the medal, Machado is not gay and took his position as a matter of principle. He is serving with the Peace Corps in Paraguay. He replied to my email from there.

He wrote, "Let me start by giving praise where praise is due: I think this is a wonderful step forward and I am thrilled to think about what a difference this decision will make in the lives of Scouts and Scouters [Scout leaders] everywhere, whether homosexual or otherwise. Why would the Boy Scouts choose to limit the good they can do in the world by discriminating against any group? It seems they have come to a similar conclusion, that opening their organization to all boys, regardless of sexual orientation, is the best way to serve those individuals, their communities and the world as a whole.

"No doubt, most of this decision has come not necessarily from any 'change of heart' (I would be willing to bet there is still a significant amount of homophobia among the BSA leadership), but instead as a reaction to public pressure. I don't mean to scoff at this historic decision. Surely this is the way that major civil rights issues are fought and changed anyway, first from public pressure and then, over time, through general acceptance in people's hearts and minds. I am glad to see that the overwhelming public campaign had its desired impact in the end.

"Still, I think it is going to take more time before this decision of policy becomes an actual change of heart for many people. There will no doubt be significant backlash from those within the organization who strongly oppose this decision. But I guess this is just the nature of civil rights issues in society.

"On another note, while it is inspiring that the BSA has voted to allow gay Scouts, it is still unfortunate that it does not include the leaders and the parents of Scouts. A more comprehensive policy change to include everyone regardless of sexual orientation would have been more just and more progressive. I think there is still plenty of room to continue to fight this issue in the future, but for now, we can be satisfied that our efforts for change are working, if slowly.

"So I guess in conclusion, I am thrilled at this new decision, happy that I could contribute to part of it in my own way, but I hope that the fight for equality and acceptance in the BSA does not stop here. There is still plenty of ground to cover.

"One day perhaps the BSA will be just the kind of open, tolerant organization that I would want my children to be a part of."